THE United Nations (UN) Security Council's decision last week to increase the size of its peacekeeping force in Democratic Republic of Congo by 5900 troops was largely in line with expectations, but this has not stopped Secretary General Kofi Annan expressing dismay at the outcome.
| "Damn! That's only half the paychecks I wanted to see coming in... errr... going out..." |
Annan had hoped for 13100 extra troops, which would have taken the UN's presence in the country to 23900. "I continue to believe that the total military and police strength (I originally) recommended is the minimum required to effectively meet the current challenges," he said in the decision's aftermath. Predictably, however, the US which bankrolls more than a quarter of the cost of peacekeeping operations was successful in persuading other key security council members to take a more cautious line. The lower number means that there will be fewer new troops for the capital, Kinshasa, as the key focus remains on the volatile east of the country. The heaviest concentration of fresh personnel will be in North Kivu and South Kivu, where SA's contingent is deployed. Col Ben Greyling, the commander of SA's forces in the area, says he expects that his units in North Kivu will be bolstered by a deployment of troops from India, which has indicated a desire to contribute to operations. Although US envoy Stuart Holliday has justified the security council's conservative decision by pointing to the fact that UN operations are stretched elsewhere in the world, question marks about the inherent success of the Congo mission may have also militated against the approval of a larger number of troops. In this latter respect it is clear that the transition process in the country is in a state of stasis, little more than a year after the creation of a coalition administration.
| Sounds like a quagmire to me... |
|